An occasional relevant reference to one's own work is fine on HN, but you've crossed into what this community considers spam, both by doing it too often and by doing it in off-topic places. That will eventually get your account and site banned, so please stop overdoing it, especially if your work is actually the kind of thing the community would find interesting in appropriate doses and places.
MaidSafe's SafeNetwork is a much more robust proposition.
Sia and Storj could be just simple apps in the SafeNetwork.
Using the Blockchain is not adequate for storage purposes, and proof of work is just as silly.
MaidSafe is rewriting all the OSI layers from layer 3 and above, guaranteeing extreme resilience, security and anonymity natively, besides of being totally distributed atomically, self-healing, self-encrypted and self-authenticaticated.
Both Storj and Sia are cute hacks compared to the massive architectural reimagining that MaidSafe is doing.
A cute hack that has been up and running in a fully decentralized fashion for more than 18 months. Something that MaidSafe cannot claim even after over a decade of development.
Sia certainly has less ambitious goals. But it also has a strong track record of delivering.
At first I thought, "meh.." and, seriously, just the globally distributed filesystem alone is incredibly hard to make very reliable, but that's the only critical job: give data back when asked.
But then I looked at your site.. looks like bidding on surplus storage on different systems. Great idea, especially if you can ensure that people don't botnet it to death. I'm looking forward to hearing great things from you in the future.
Every time there's an outage like this (AWS, Github, etc) you'll see posts about decentralizing. I consider it, then realize that getting started on decentralization will take longer than the highly reliable service's downtime I'm trying to plan for.
The google guy pointed out that they are API-compatible (thus easy to run side-by-side) and, most import IMHO, he was humble, self-deprecating, and honest.
This here is insane. The claim that something nobody has ever heard of is more reliable than AWS or Google is the worst possible way to promote the product – even if true.
Perhaps I did a bad job of explaining, but it's a fundamentally different architecture, based on the same technology as Bitcoin. It's a platform that's been designed to outlive its parent company. And many blockchains already have outlived the companies and developers that built them. This one just happens to focus on cloud storage.
That would be because the Google employee didn't claim they were "immune" to problems, and actually admitted having their own problems from time to time.
